Skip to main content

About your Search

20120928
20121006
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
, george w. bush still won. and this election's going to be decided in the end based on how those last undecided persuadable voters fall and based on who does a better job of getting their vote to the polls and that's what will decide the outcome. >> cornell, i mean, i heard what you said before, but i got to i guess, the more i think about it, i got to push back more on this because even the president's final statement at the end, which is something i assume is the most easy thing to rehearse, at the end it seemed kind of like he was like well, i'll keep trying. i think -- i don't want to -- i'm paraphrasing it that way. >> anderson, i don't think that's fair at all. two things here. one is i've got to push back on one of the things. the predicate that you just laid out about sort of why mitt romney had such a great performance about how he was factually on health care, the critique of the president's health care was a flat-out lie. the government takeover of health care, every fact checker in the world has said that's just not true. the idea that you're going to lose your health insu
under president obama as compared to the george w. bush years. >> dave: from george w. bush and not free from criticism. 4.9 trillion dollar increase in the nation's debt. but here we are three years into the obama presidency talking 5.36 trillion dollar increase in our nation's debt. that's pretty simple to fact check. i'm surprised joe biden continues to bait those fact checkers, with statements like that. that's a pretty-- that's a slam-dunk. >> alisyn: because people don't listen to his speeches with the calculator out and listen with their guts and resonates. they have been saying the same thing for the better part of almost four years so it must be working on the campaign trail with them. >> dave: and doing some hypnotizing before that. stare into the pen. >> alisyn: all right. let's get to your headlines, because, to tell you about right now. there was another insider attack that claimed the life of a soldier and contractor. 2000 american troops killed in afghanistan sense the war began. iran's president ahmadnejad says threats mean nothing, and the u.s. does not allow iran the ac
. >> let me say this, if this were george w. bush and this happened on his watch, how would the media have covered it. >> they would be calling for not just an investigation but far greater than that. >> would it have been covered far monday than it was. >> i don't know. these hypotheticals are hard toe. no that's certainly what critics say because it's the obama administration and so many members of the mainstream media are liberal. it's not getting the national and international attention it needs. have you been pointing out a lot of coverage in print media and a lot of coverage to the evening news. morning news where the majority of americans who still watch television get their news, it's the morning news shows that media research center shows that good morning america and "the today show" have been woefulfully inadequate in their coverage of this. >> here is the general media coverage on everything. take a look at this hole poll out from news organizations spending more time defending president obama. 47% in this poll to 16% for defend will romney they say or 21% both. and this poll t
, george w. bush got outspent by $100 million. so the unions and the super pacs on the left and george soros funded super pacs, you're going to have plenty of money. i'm not worried about that. what i'm very excited about is having the resources to respond to your attacks. >> this is actually an important point. dan eagan has an important piece that folks should take a look at. between charlie and all the other groups out there, they've had a lot of money. whether that money has been strategically spent is the question. we've focused a laser on the middle class. there's a week in august where restore had an ad up about jobs, crossroads had an ad up about the debt. >> those are three republican-oriented super pacs. >> romney was advertising on welfare reform. if you're a voter in toledo, you're saying what is the story they're trying to tell about president obama? i get that they don't like him but what is the strategy here? on the republican side, a reason that the money has slowed down a little bit is that people are disappointed with the overall big picture, strategic. >> i'm sure yo
of approaching. you think back to george w. bush when the whole war on terror started and there was always talk about what a tough battle this was going to be for the rest of our lifetimes basically. and sort of admitting that up fronts, but that the efforts were diligent to make sure that we were going to continue to combat this war on terror. it's almost as if right now 36 days before the election, you don't really want to talk about that side of it, that there might be a reinsurgentence now of equaled, even though osama bin laden is dead. there might still be a resurgence of al-qaeda. >> eric: last night on "60 minutes," there was a fantastic piece on interviewing president karzai from afghanistan and also our general boots on the ground in afghanistan, they have a little bit different take on where al-qaeda is. take a listen. >> al-qaeda has come back. al-qaeda is a resilient organization. but they're not here in large numbers. but al-qaeda doesn't have to be anywhere in large numbers. >> the reason for the nato and american intervention in afghanistan was terrorism. terrorism has not gone
go back to when george w. bush was president of the united states and when gas was, what, 3 bucks a gallon, something like that? it was gigantic letters on the headline, the paper of the "new york times" where they were hammering it. now we've got a president where the gas has doubled. i think it was 1.85 when he took office. now close to 4 bucks. >> i think that we have seen, steve, an amazing propensity of the media to kind of put a very positive spin on some pretty not so impresssive economic news. >> steve: what is that? >> because maybe i think a number of us have been stunned by the extent to which this time at least headline writers seem to lean towards democrats. if you have headline about slow growth, you would expect to see that in the headline. but instead, you see a headline in the times or the journal about a stock surge instead. they did a study at -- aei did a study that showed 15% of the headline which is tended to be more positive given grim economic news and when you're talking about democrats. >> steve: the word is not getting out. >> they're cheerleading they'r
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)